Reynolds at Lock



  • What does everyone think about this!

    If Cleary was to come and you go with….

    6. Luke Brooks
    7. Nathan Cleary
    9. Jacob Liddle
    13. Josh Reynolds

    then go all forwards on the bench and at the 60th min mark Jacob Liddle goes off with Reynolds moving to hooker and bring on a forward to play lock from the bench.

    We’ve got a useless attacking threat with ET anyways at lock

    Thoughts?


  • ForumSupporter

    I have a head ache… :brick:

    Tacky…help…?



  • @:

    What does everyone think about this!

    If Cleary was to come and you go with….

    6. Luke Brooks
    7. Nathan Cleary
    9. Jacob Liddle
    13. Josh Reynolds

    then go all forwards on the bench and at the 60th min mark Jacob Liddle goes off with Reynolds moving to hooker and bring on a forward to play lock from the bench.

    We’ve got a useless attacking threat with ET anyways at lock

    Thoughts?

    We need to go heavier in the forwards not lighter.



  • Don’t agree with it just a suggestion…



  • @:

    What does everyone think about this!

    If Cleary was to come and you go with….

    6. Luke Brooks
    7. Nathan Cleary
    9. Jacob Liddle
    13. Josh Reynolds

    then go all forwards on the bench and at the 60th min mark Jacob Liddle goes off with Reynolds moving to hooker and bring on a forward to play lock from the bench.

    We’ve got a useless attacking threat with ET anyways at lock

    Thoughts?

    My god you come up with some crap - Why don’t you play lock?

    our current lock isn’t getting the numbers we need, How would this help exactly?



  • @:

    @:

    What does everyone think about this!

    If Cleary was to come and you go with….

    6. Luke Brooks
    7. Nathan Cleary
    9. Jacob Liddle
    13. Josh Reynolds

    then go all forwards on the bench and at the 60th min mark Jacob Liddle goes off with Reynolds moving to hooker and bring on a forward to play lock from the bench.

    We’ve got a useless attacking threat with ET anyways at lock

    Thoughts?

    My god you come up with some crap - Why don’t you play lock?

    our current lock isn’t getting the numbers we need, How would this help exactly?

    Lol settle down big fella

    It;s a suggestion mate don’t take it too personal - can you name me someone else we’ve got on our squad that could play lock besides ET?..… and dont say Esiunhuth 😆

    “why don’t you play lock?” you just lost all creditabiitly that comes from your mouth with 5 words congrats



  • Thoughts?

    If he came up to me and said that?

    I’d assume he’d been hitting the crystal meth way too hard.



  • @:

    I have a head ache… :brick:

    Tacky…help…?

    Deja vu


  • Banned

    @:

    Thoughts?

    If he came up to me and said that?

    I’d assume he’d been hitting the crystal meth way too hard.

    😂😂

    In all honesty though I think Reynolds will be best served in a segyaro type role rotating with Liddle. If he doesnt like it, too bad



  • @:

    I have a head ache… :brick:

    Tacky…help…?

    Tacky’s busy….
    Can I help ?
    😃



  • I think reynolds would go just as well at lock as he does at hooker.Not very good



  • Nah!!



  • ……and the ghost of Tim Sheens still haunts the forum to this day.



  • No



  • @:

    @:

    Thoughts?

    If he came up to me and said that?

    I’d assume he’d been hitting the crystal meth way too hard.

    😂😂

    In all honesty though I think Reynolds will be best served in a segyaro type role rotating with Liddle. If he doesnt like it, too bad

    I’m sure he’d do ok.

    But you also need to consider what he might have been promised before he signed up.

    Signing a marquee player with the promise to play five-eighth and then backflipping on it would be poor form.


Log in to reply
 

Recent Topics